Innovation Attributes

Chapter three discussed the attributes of innovations as identified by Rogers (2003) and showed that they were an area where more careful consideration was needed to allow them to be relevant with regard to professional practice innovations within a

construction specific context.

The primary data has highlighted that while some aspects of Rogers (2003) attributes are applicable, there are areas that need to be added and also areas that are not

applicable at all. These will now be considered in turn, with appropriate rationale provided for each, all with relation to the NRM as the innovation under investigation.

5.5.1 Relative Advantage

This particular term is used to cover all manner of advantages of an innovation, but owing to the nature of the construction industry and the findings of the primary data it was felt that this broad heading was no longer suitable. In particular Rogers (2003) makes no mention of the commercial aspects of an innovation, and specifically the financial benefits. Therefore, this aspect of commercial advantage is seen as a key attribute and will be identified separately.

The notion of other advantages still stands and is similar to the findings of Kramer et al.

(2009) who cited that the relevance and usefulness of the innovation would influence its diffusion. This is with regard to other aspects such as currency of the innovation and its practical advantages. The knowledge of NRM varied significantly across respondents, but there was a universal perception that it didn’t really offer any advantage over existing practices. Even SH – SA-RICS-P-£L-L, the only respondent to actually produce a BQ using NRM2, could only identify the main advantage being links with NRM1 and how this provided a joined up approach to the cost management and analysis of projects. When asked about advantages to the actual rules themselves he stated “In terms of any ground-breaking changes in the way we measure, none at all”.

One of the positive advantages that was highlighted in the primary data collection was that the NRM offers more robust measurement rules for modular building and also for demolition and alteration works. Therefore, this attribute is still applicable and can

remain as a key factor that can influence the diffusion process as not all advantages have to relate back to commercial aspects.

5.5.2 Commercial Advantage

The aspect of commercial advantage was raised by almost all respondents and in particular when asked what the main trigger to rejection was. It was felt that the NRM offered no commercial advantage and that the other relative advantages were not significant enough to outweigh the commercial aspect. Rogers (2003) overlooked the commercial attributes of innovations as his work was of a more general nature and covered innovations from new medicines through to the introduction of clean water supplies to developing countries so it is easy to see why it was not high on his agenda.

Within a construction context however the commercial aspects of an innovation have not been ignored with both Arditi (1997) and Mitropoulous and Tatum (2000)

highlighting the concept of competitive advantage as a motivator to adoption, although neither of these directly addresses the concept of innovation attributes or their influence on an actor’s diffusion journey with regard to the wider diffusion literature.

For the purposes of this research commercial advantage means any advantage offered by an innovation that provides the adopter with an improved commercial position, which can be in respect of time, financial or service quality.

5.5.3 Compatibility

Compatibility is an important attribute that was identified by Rogers (2003) and is to remain within the boundaries and context of this research. The two respondent groups, PQS and CQS, had very different perspectives on the compatibility of the NRM with the PQS respondents seeing no issues, while the CQS’s were concerned with both internal and external compatibility. Internal compatibility was considered to be aspects such as existing staff abilities and software issues, while external compatibility was a key aspect of the rejection of the NRM as the compatibility with the supply chain was cited as being a risk that they were not prepared to take at this stage. The supply chain is a significant factor and one that is quite unique to the construction industry due to the

temporary nature of the projects and the project teams. This compatibility issue is significant and can be seen as a major barrier to the adoption of the NRM.

5.5.4 Complexity, Trialability and Observability

These attributes as identified by Rogers (2003) are considered irrelevant to the current research context and as such will be omitted from any further discussion.

Complexity was deemed irrelevant by respondents as they all considered themselves as able to adopt a new professional practice, in this case the NRM. No respondent reported this as being an influencing factor and in fact was quite the opposite with all having confidence in their own abilities to be able to adopt and use the NRM when and if required. This is not unexpected from professionals such as those interviewed. MR – Dir-RICS-C-£S-S stated that “as a practising quantity surveyor you should be able to use it (NRM) essentially”, and this was mirrored by several respondents who all

suggested that anyone who was familiar with the previous measurement methods should be able to utilise the new ones. SW – CM-RICS-C-£M-M suggested that there would be a transition period where one would need to get used to the NRM purely because of the length of experience of using the SMM7, but overall the respondents are all

professionals and none suggested that the complexity of something would be a barrier to adoption, but that it was more a balance of complexity against commercial benefit.

Trialability was ruled out as respondents felt that they did not have the time to run trials, as they were all too busy on live projects. The other concern was that any trial would not identify the real consequences of the use of the NRM on a live project when dealing with multiple parties. This supports the findings of Pries and Janszen (1995) who suggested that the trialling of an innovation is not practical within the construction industry.

Observability was also ruled out as being possible by respondents owing to the

confidential nature of the industry and the legal restrictions around competition between rival companies. The issue with measurement practice in particular is that it is linked with cost data, which is confidential on a project basis, so being able to see this data from afar is not possible. Not only is the data confidential for the organisation, they

need to be careful with cost data and any perceived improper practices such as bid rigging and cover pricing, both of which have been the subject of ongoing

investigations from the Office of Fair Trading (OFT) in the UK (Building 2009). The only area where CQSs observed NRM in use was when an NRM BQ had been received for tender which, as identified earlier, is very rare.

This was further supported by respondents stating that they were quite isolated from the wider industry and very rarely spoke to other actors about their work and that any conversations were project specific. This was different to the respondent’s discussion of observing others internally, within organisations, as some respondents work for very large organisations and regularly shares ideas within teams. This in turn gives a very narrow social network, and does not allow the development of the weak ties

(Granovetter 1978) that are required for diffusion across wider networks.

5.5.5 Summary of Innovation Attributes

To summarise this section, it is clear that the literature and primary data support a revision to the classical Rogers (2003) innovation attributes. Whereas some are still relevant, there is a need for a more commercial aspect to these and also a realisation that the construction industry is unique with its fragmented nature and temporary supply chains. These aspects have a significant impact on how actors communicate with each other and therefore on the diffusion of innovation.

It is therefore proposed that the influence of the innovations attributes remains as a part of this contextual investigation and that the relevant attributes are as follows:

1. Relative Advantage.

2. Commercial Advantage.

3. Compatibility.

These will need to be considered in terms of their timing and influence on an actors’

diffusion journey and this will be discussed in more detail in the next chapter where the development of the Rogers (2003) innovation-decision process is presented.